Please note: we have been online over ten years, and we want The Trek BBS to continue as a free site. But if you block our ads we are at risk.Please consider unblocking ads for this site - every ad you view counts and helps us pay for the bandwidth that you are using. Thank you for your understanding.

Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.

I have accepted a long time ago that the Trek I grew up with is gone, it's not coming back.

JJ Trek IS just popcorn action films, that's what sells now.

I enjoy the new movies for what they are, but the pioneer spirit, the ethics, the exploration is done. People don't want it.

It's a shame but that's just the way it is.

Anyone who misses "Star Trek" and isn't 100% satisfied with "JJ Trek" I suggest getting into the Star Trek books because the spirit lives on in those.

I agree, but I'm not as down about it as you are.

Firstly, the Roddenberry vision didn't prove that great - it was OK for TOS but the movies and TNG only got good after Gene got the boot. He'd have had a blue fit about DS9, and that's the best Trek out there imho.

JJ Trek is like it is, because it's 'The Movies' and that's how movies are nowadays. Any new TV show would probably be a lot closer to Trek as we know it.

Anyhow, the continuation novels are fantastic !

__________________
Soon oh soon the light, Pass within and soothe this endless night, And wait here for you, Our reason to be here...

Firstly, the Roddenberry vision didn't prove that great - it was OK for TOS but the movies and TNG only got good after Gene got the boot. He'd have had a blue fit about DS9, and that's the best Trek out there imho.

JJ Trek is like it is, because it's 'The Movies' and that's how movies are nowadays. Any new TV show would probably be a lot closer to Trek as we know it.

Anyhow, the continuation novels are fantastic !

Yeah certainly a lot of what came after Gene handed over the reigns was different, more of an evolution imo.

JJ Trek is more slimmed down, it's not bad at all but it doesn't engage my imagination the same way as TOS-TNG-DS9 did.

I think maybe if they do a new TV show i'd be interested because they'd have some ongoing story arcs and it couldn't just be battles and explosions and chase scenes non-stop.

"real trek" at the movies was always hit and miss, what they have going now is safe but ultimately successful

I definitely have to agree that Star Trek got better once Roddenberry wasn't suppressing the writing talent. The JJverse isn't really my thing, but I can see why some would like it. Far too effects dependent for my tastes.

I definitely have to agree that Star Trek got better once Roddenberry wasn't suppressing the writing talent.

He didn't. The only thing Roddenberry insisted on was that by the time of TNG our heroes spend more time fighting bad guys than each other. Half-way though the first season, he turned over the reins to Berman and stepped back into a supervisory role (primarily okaying what Berman was doing).

__________________"Don't sweat the small stuff--it makes you small-minded..."

You honestly think TNG got better after Roddenberry passed on the reigns???

The characters lost their souls. They didn't care about each other. Under Roddenberry the members of the USS Enterprise were family. Berman turned the ship into a cold, corporate work place.

They were one-dimensional characters that served nothing but to advance the plot.

And how about a little philosophy with your science fiction? You didn't see it under Berman. Berman era writers could barely write a plot let alone put some meaning into it.

Watch an episode of ENT and tell me that's not true.

Now, what I intended to post:

Star Trek is like fine art in this respect: there are many Cubists but only one Pablo Picasso. With Picasso dead we will never see Cubism created at such a high level. Same with Star Trek: Roddenberry died and took Star Trek with him. Such is the nature of creativity.

Enjoy what he left us.

__________________"You may be wrong, but you may be right." - Billy Joel

You honestly think TNG got better after Roddenberry passed on the reigns???

The characters lost their souls. They didn't care about each other. Under Roddenberry the members of the USS Enterprise were family. Berman turned the ship into a cold, corporate work place.

They were one-dimensional characters that served nothing but to advance the plot.

And how about a little philosophy with your science fiction? You didn't see it under Berman. Berman era writers could barely write a plot let alone put some meaning into it.

Watch an episode of ENT and tell me that's not true.

Now, what I intended to post:

Star Trek is like fine art in this respect: there are many Cubists but only one Pablo Picasso. With Picasso dead we will never see Cubism created at such a high level. Same with Star Trek: Roddenberry died and took Star Trek with him. Such is the nature of creativity.

Enjoy what he left us.

Were we watching the same shows?

I'm a big fan of TOS. TNG, not so much. But your characterization of the "Berman era" doesn't ring very true.

I'll concede that Enterprise's characterization was completely lacking on so many levels, but the post-Roddenberry TNG and DS9 was Trek's finest hour in my opinion.

Finest hour eh?

I always found the characters in DS9/VOY and later TNG cringeworthy, sort of the characterisation and acting panache found in a eary 90's straight-to-video movie.

This made Trek unpaletable to millions of others who refused to go see Berman era trek, as the characters were totally charmless and unengaging.

The most successfull TNG era/Post roddenberry movie I believe was First contact, where a bunch of pale actors in rubber suits walk around like they had a carrot stuck up their behind and not say a word upstaged the main cast.

I'll concede that Enterprise's characterization was completely lacking on so many levels, but the post-Roddenberry TNG and DS9 was Trek's finest hour in my opinion.

Finest hour eh?

I always found the characters in DS9/VOY and later TNG cringeworthy, sort of the characterisation and acting panache found in a eary 90's straight-to-video movie.

This made Trek unpaletable to millions of others who refused to go see Berman era trek, as the characters were totally charmless and unengaging.

The most successfull TNG era/Post roddenberry movie I believe was First contact, where a bunch of pale actors in rubber suits walk around like they had a carrot stuck up their behind and not say a word upstaged the main cast.

Just sums up the characterisation of post-Roddenberry Trek.

I just love when people state their opinions as if they're fact and find it acceptable to mock people who don't share their opinions as if it somehow is a fault for not thinking what they do. But yeah when the substantive argument includes phrases like "carrot stuck up their behind" well what can you expect?

A title which is a blatant lie. As a Trekkie who liked the movie, I deeply resent it when people who didn't like it claim that their personal opinion represents the consensus of all fandom. It's cowardly and dishonest to hide behind that pretense rather than just saying "This is my own personal view," and it's dismissive and insulting to those of us who have our own diverse opinions.
.

Amen. I keep vowing I won't get sucked into this same old debate again, but then somebody plays the "all real Trekkies hate the reboot" card again and my hackles ride.

Just the other day, I was contacted by a reporter who wanted to gin up controversy by pitting old-school Trekkies against the new movie . . . and who seemed genuinely surprised and frustrated when I refused to play along! (At one point, he actually asked me to recommend a Trek author who would be willing to state that the new movies weren't "real" Trek, but I declined to cooperate.)

And, as usual, he seemed to have bought into the myth that TOS was a "non-violent" series that never stooped to cheap thrills or action. I admit my jaw dropped to hear this from a professional journalist whom you'd think would have actually done a little research on the original series.

Jesus Christ, I pointed out, barely an episode went by that Kirk didn't get into fistfight, Federation colonies and outposts were wiped out on a regular basis, and all those redshirts didn't exactly die of natural causes. "Non-violent" indeed!

Which Roddenberry are you referring to? The Roddenberry of TOS days? Or are you wanting the Gene from the early days of TNG's development? The Roddenberry who had basically lost most of his faculties and burned practically every bridge with TOS staff he had brought on board to shepherd the new show. The same gene who was pitching overly sexualized ideas like Betazoids having four breasts and the Ferengi being extremely well endowed in their nether regions (that would have been fun to see on syndicated TV).

More Sex Trek baby!

__________________
I have no... precious time at all to spend... nor service to do, till you...

So long as you have engaging characters and stories, the actual look isn't as important.

__________________
On the continent of wild endeavour in the mountains of solace and solitude there stood the citadel of the time lords, the oldest and most mighty race in the universe looking down on the galaxies below sworn never to interfere only to watch.